Path: utzoo!ncc!lyndon
From: lyndon@ncc.Nexus.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: why both d.can.? and d.can.??.?
Message-ID: <10388@ncc.Nexus.CA>
Date: 26 Aug 88 17:06:49 GMT
References: <316@telly.UUCP> <1385@maccs.McMaster.CA>
Reply-To: lyndon@nexus.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Distribution: can
Organization: Nexus Computing Inc.
Lines: 27

In article <1385@maccs.McMaster.CA> dan@maccs.UUCP (Dan Trottier) writes:
 
>I'm not sure what the problem is here but the .CA domain is not the same
>as the .COM, .EDU, .ORG, ... domains. These domains are part of the ARPA
>net and CA is not. I expect the new .US domain will have a file similar
>to the d.can.*.[123] files. 

Not true. COM, EDU, and ORG are not restricted to ARPA or the Internet
(look at the entry for sq.com). The U.S. went with several top level
domains due to the large number of sub-domains they expected to register.
Canada doesn't warrant multiple top level domains (despite what the
CDNNet people think) due to the relatively low number of sites in the
country. The CA domain is no better than, or in any way inferior to,
domains such as COM, etc...

As for d.can.1 vs d.can.xx.1, it appears Rayan is trying to simplify
things from an administrative viewpoint by maintaining seperate files
for the second level provincial "park" domains. Anyone who registers
under a provincial domain (e.g. .apss.ab.ca) is listed in d.can.ab.1,
while those directly registering a second level domain (e.g. .nexus.ca)
are listed in d.can.1. This convention could change as the name space
fills up.

-- 
VE6BBM   {alberta,pyramid,uunet}!ncc!lyndon  lyndon@Nexus.CA
-- 
VE6BBM   {alberta,pyramid,uunet}!ncc!lyndon  lyndon@Nexus.CA